From: utzoo!decvax!cca!mo@Lbl-Unix@sri-unix
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Title: Re:  Information on Unix/Vax peculiarities
Article-I.D.: sri-unix.4779
Posted: Fri Dec 10 03:55:11 1982
Received: Mon Dec 13 04:53:53 1982

From: mo at Lbl-Unix (Mike O'Dell [system])
Date: 6 Dec 1982 10:46:49-PST
Assuming ints and pointers are the same size produces all the
cruft which was so carefully removed going from v6 to v7.  Keep
in mind that on some machines, particuarly word-addressed,
pointers to different things a CAN BE DIFFERENT SIZES!  A pointer
to an int might be a natural address, while a pointer to a char
might need 1 to 4 additional bits to resolve a char within a word.
You CANNOT assume anything about sizes; that's what unions are for.
I completely agree that universal types are useful; that is what
(char *) can almost always be used for pointers.  On MOST machines,
A union of a (char *) and a (double) would be the biggest
"natural" object, while a union of (char *) and (int) or (long)
would probably do most of the time.

	-Mike